S. Muralidhar, J.

1. This is the third round of litigation concerning the Petitioner's application dated 13th December 2006 for re-verification of its status as an Army Sustainment Command (`ASC') contractor by the Headquarters Western Command of the Army, Respondent No. 3 herein. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 26th October 2009 as further amended by an order dated 31st October 2009 by Respondent No. 3 declining the Petitioner's request for re-verification as an approved ASC contractor.

2. The Petitioner M/s. Roshni Enterprises, is a proprietary concern of which Mrs. Roshni Devi wife of Shri D.P.S. Sangwan is the proprietor. The Petitioner made an application dated 28th November 1995 for registration as an approved ASC contractor. The Petitioner was granted registration on 19th December 1996. After re-verification the Petitioner was again registered as an approved ASC contractor on 7th January 2002 and this was valid up to 6th January 2007.

3. On 14th August 2006 Respondent No. 1 wrote to the Petitioner advising it to get itself re-verified well in time. A copy of the relevant form was also enclosed. The letter stated that in the event the re-verification was not completed before 6th January 2007 the Petitioner's name would be removed from the approved list of ASC contractors.

4. On 8th December 2006 Respondent No. 3 forwarded to Respondent No. 4, i.e., Deputy Director of Supply & Transport (`DDST') Headquarters at Delhi Cantonment for further processing the Petitioner's application dated 30th November 2006 for re-verification. The Petitioner on 11th December 2006 forwarded to the DDST the documents as asked by it on 8th December 2006. On 13th December 2006 Respondent No. 4 again asked the Petitioner to submit an application form. On 19th January 2007, Respondent No. 4 wrote to the Petitioner stating that there are certain shortcomings in the application as observed by the Board of Officers (`BOO'). The Petitioner was asked to resubmit the duly rectified application in a sealed envelope by registered post for further handing over to BOO and scrutiny of the same. On 20th January 2007 the Petitioner offered an explanation to the Additional Director of Supply & Transport (`ADST') clarifying that Mrs. Roshni Devi had not carried out any business activity during the year 2003-04 and that the only source of income was the interest amounting to Rs. 33,760/- (net after deduction). A copy of the latest income tax return and a letter from the State Bank of India (`SBI'), Delhi Cantonment for change of address were also enclosed. On 28th February 2007 the ADST again notified the Petitioner about certain shortcomings. In response thereto, on 5th March 2007 the Petitioner further clarified as under:

"1. (a)

That the subject property No. WZ-169A, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi - 110046 belongs to me and I am the owner of subject property. The property is not at all rented out and is in my possession.

(b)

that as another property is a agricultural land and it is in my full possession, walls on this property cannot be drawn being a agricultural land.

(c)

photographs of both the properties are enclosed.

2.

The FDR submitted along with the application form is from 14th December 2006 to 12th December 2013, i.e. seven years whereas your requirement should not be less than six years. Hence the observation made by the Board of Officers is not correct".

5. On 15th March 2007 Respondent No. 2 DDST wrote to the Petitioner asking for an affidavit to be submitted which was done by the Petitioner on 17th March 2007. By a letter dated 10th January 2007 the Petitioner requested for completion of the re-verification at the earliest so that the Petitioner would be able to participate in the tender contract process for the year 2008-09. The Petitioner had clarified in its letter that at present it was operating from WZ-169, A/5, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi - 110046 and that it was not allied with any other firm.

6. Aggrieved by the non-completion of the re